Hobby Lobby Horror

There is a problem with people who use their political leanings rather than legal doctrine and procedure being judges, that is they come up with piss poor legal decisions.

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S. ___ (2014) will turn out to be yet another of the US Supreme Court's recent blunders because it used political leanings rather than legal method.

The concept that a corporation is a distinct entity with its own rights and obligations separate from those of its shareholders is the foundational principle of corporate law.

This concept means that people can invest in a company without risking personal assets beyond their investment (i.e., shares in the corporation). For example, the victim can only sue the corporation, not the individual shareholders if a corporation fails to observe proper safety precautions in manufacturing a product. This benefit is especially important for closely held corporations, like Hobby Lobby, because any liability would otherwise be shared by a small number of family members or other controlling shareholders. In exchange for this protection, individual owners are not supposed to treat a corporation as a mere extension of themselves.

Under the new decision, religious owners of closely-held, for-profit companies try to have it both ways. They get to assert their personal religious identity to exclude legally mandated birth-control benefits from their company’s health insurance plan. Yet they hope they also will still enjoy the insulation against personal economic liability that comes from doing business as a corporation.

The problem with this is that is that one cannot really have things both ways: one must either function as a corporate entity which is separate from the personal interests of the shareholder or accept full liability for the corporation.  In other words, this decision will “pierce of the corporate veil”, which is where the the rights or duties of a corporation switch to the rights or liabilities of its shareholders.  In other words, Plaintiffs may seek to have owners personally cover a corporate debt when a business goes bust, for example, or to hold a corporation responsible when an owner doesn’t have the money to pay their personal bills.

While I understand that the chickens have begun to come home to roost with this decision, this aspect has yet to rear its ugly face.  I have a feeling that when it does, the reality challenged right wing will find yet another aspect of its ideology influenced policy making will prove to be another golem for them to have to address.

Ah, poor Holly Hobby Lobby-loving Fisher - welcome to your theocratic corporatocracy

A follow up to Laci's post about gun porn queen wannabee posing with her gun, her Bible, and her flag, in the exact same pose as a Muslim woman doing the same thing.

While not as on-topic for gun issues, it does display the poor thinking and factual ignorance of the conservatives generally, particularly the faux-patriot religious right, and why they should have little or no influence on our politics or government.

These are dumb, narrow-minded, violent bigots.  The only appropriate response to these bimbos and bozos is to point and laugh, and laugh and laugh.

Her insurance company demands a waiver to not have to follow the ACA guidelines and raise their rates but it's Obama's fault. Right.

Busted: Holly ‘Hobby Lobby’ Fisher’s Anti-Obamacare Sob Story Exposed as Typical GOP Hypocrisy and LIES

AATTP.org

H/t to AATP on facebook for this! (LOVE ATTP!!!  - give them a look!)
courtesy of Americans Against the Tea Party web site:

Busted: Holly ‘Hobby Lobby’ Fisher’s Anti-Obamacare Sob Story Exposed as Typical GOP Hypocrisy and LIES

Posted by: Paul Loebe in GOP War on Women, Most Popular on AATTP, TEApublican Smack Downs July 7, 2014

Intrigued by the ridiculousness that is Holly Fisher I wandered over to the blog she set up and decided to do some investigation.

In late May, we were notified that because of tripling premiums, my husband’s employer was dropping Cigna for a new insurance. This comes one year after they dropped United Healthcare because premiums were increasing drastically.  United and Cigna are very similar and adequate insurances, however we did lose coverage, options, and our deductible went from one thousand per family member to two thousand per family member.  Out of pocket for our family went from eight thousand.

Wait, so the same ignorant woman that stood in front of Hobby Lobby with a Chick-Fil-A cup just to piss off liberals – while at the same time supporting Hobby Lobby for controlling the healthcare decisions of the women in their employ – is upset that her husband’s employer CHOSE THEIR INSURANCE FOR THEM! How dare they!
Except wait…let’s just blame Obamacare! Thanks Obama!
But wait! One dumb turn deserves another.

So despite the fact the law was designed to stop premiums from going up – by requiring 80% of healthcare premiums to pay for *gasp* healthcare, as well as restricting companies from placing a cap on healthcare benefits – this law failed to do so. Why? Because certain states and companies (West Virginia and Cigna specifically) applied for waivers that made them exempt from following the letter of the law.

Basically, these companies and states DIDN’T follow Obamacare by the letter….Holly’s health insurance premiums rose, and her company – in their infinite wisdom – chose to get another policy, because that is their right as determined by the Supreme Court, after all.
So I guess it’s okay for Hobby Lobby to determine the health insurance they can provide for their employees but not for Holly’s company to do the same. Holly is upset and whines about it because it affects her life. It puts her child in danger. She wants everyone to feel sorry for her. And in fact I do! I don’t think that she should be forced to accept sub-par coverage for her child’s condition because her employees chose the health plan for them.
Am I sensing another conservative playing the Teapublican tune that “I care when it affects me, but not when it affects others.”
Let me break it down for Holly ‘Hobby Lobby’ Fisher. We liberals want you and EVERYONE to have access to affordable healthcare where the rate isn’t determined by some corporate fat-cat who thinks he knows better than what you and your family need. We also don’t think employers should be involved in making those decisions. We think YOU and YOUR FAMILY should. The solution for that? Single payer. The sore back-up plan? Obamacare.
Your plan? The corporatocracy controlling a market designed to give them profit without concern for any of the citizens of the Republic…
Sounds legit.
How’s that glass house feel?